Talk:Transcendentalism
From Academic Kids
for prior comments, see Talk:Transcendentalism/Archive
I think the article needs more on the history of Transcendentalism, and should be divided into sections, one of philosophy and one on the history itself. - Pingveno 20:37, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)
What's the relavance of linking "transcendental meditation" from the artcle? They appear to have little in common besides a name.
I think the link to Kant and other hard philosophers and philosophy should be de-emphisized. Trancendetalism though having philosophical pretensions was primarily a literary movement. It was not a product of german idealism so much as german romanticism and romanticism generally. The idealist philosophers influenced a lot of romantics aside from just the New England crew. This is a common tension in views of Emerson, and some others like Theraue, and Carlyle, they wrote in a tone that might be interpreted as philosophical but did not call themselves philosophers. Emerson called himself always a poet. He attacked philosophy in favor of the poetic outlook. Some like Stanley Cavell have tried to say Emerson was a philosopher, but I think they are in the distinct minority, and change the meaning of philosopher to do so. The way the article is now leaves the immpresion that these were just a bunch of ametuer, "table top" philosophers. I think the reality is that they were a very dynamic literary movement that in many ways founded American culture. By the way theirs a nice quote from Charles Dickens in his notes on America which was mostly a critical look, that talks about the Boston Trancendentalist, and ends with him saying "If I lived in Boston I would be a trancendentalist too." Or something like that. You could google it.--Case 21:16, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- It seems to me that the narrow definition of philosophy which would include Kant as "hard" and exclude (e.g.) Emerson is a distinctively twentieth-century invention. The standard anthology The Transcendentalists, edited by the intellectual historian Perry Miller, is instructive on this topic, portraying Transcendentalism as primarily theological-philosophical rather than literary. And the claim that Transcendentalism is a literary movement founders on the extremely thin literary production of the movement anyway (especially if we use "literary" in the way the 19th C. authors would have understood it, as referring to poetry and fiction), as compared to their prodigious and excellent criticism, scholarship, lectures and essays. So I don't think it's out of place to characterize it as a theological and philosophical movement as much as, or more than, a literary one (and the Kant reference is primarily an explanation of the name, anyway). But the article can certainly be improved in many ways, so feel free to make whatever changes seem appropriate. -- Rbellin 04:12, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Would like some help
Does anyone know what kind of relation the Transcendentalists philosophy has with Nietzsche's? Are they antagonistic? As I'm not familiarized with the latter, I'd really much like to know. Edited: The Individual 00:52 2/V/05
- Nietzsche read Emerson and was influenced by him to some degree. Beyond that, matters are less settled, and there's not a whole lot of scholarship on the relationship. There's a book called Nietzsche and Emerson: An Elective Affinity, ISBN 0821410377, that you might look at for more on the relationship. -- Rbellin|Talk 00:41, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
